DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 10/8/25 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-2, 4-6, 8-9, 11, 15, 20, 24, and 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Peng et al. (US 2020/0185483) in view of Ishii (US 2009/0236993) and Dai et al. (US 2021/0407868).
Regarding claim 1, Peng discloses a display panel comprising a displaying region and a peripheral region surrounding the displaying region, wherein: the peripheral region comprises a bonding sub-region located on one side of the displaying region (abstract, figs. 2-4, ¶ 44-45, ¶ 68-76, display region 210 with peripheral region outside of display region, bonding pads 23 and 24);
a region of the peripheral region other than the bonding sub-region comprises a first testing-unit group and a second testing-unit group, and each of the first testing-unit group and the second testing-unit group comprises one or more circuit testing units (figs. 2-4, ¶ 44-45, ¶ 68-76, test pads 21 and 22 grouped on left and right sides of substrate 20);
the displaying region comprises a first lateral side and a second lateral side that extend in a first direction and face each other, wherein the first direction refers to a direction from the bonding sub-region pointing to the displaying region (figs. 2-4, ¶ 44-45, ¶ 68-76, left and right sides of display region 210);
a maximum distance from the first testing-unit group to the first lateral side in a direction perpendicular to the first direction is equal to a maximum distance from the second testing-unit group to the second lateral side in the direction perpendicular to the first direction (figs. 2-4, ¶ 44-45, ¶ 68-76, test pads 21 and 22 on left and right sides of substrate 20 arranged symmetrically with respect to center of display region 210),
Peng fails to disclose the region of the peripheral region other than the bonding sub-region comprises a light shielding layer; an inner contour of an orthographic projection of the light shielding layer on a substrate of the display panel contacts an edge of the displaying region; and both of the first testing-unit group and the second testing-unit group are located on one side of the light shielding layer that is farther from the displaying region, and orthographic projections of the first testing-unit group and the second testing-unit group on the substrate do not overlap with the orthographic projection of the light shielding layer on the substrate, wherein each of the circuit testing units comprises a pad.
Ishii teaches the region of the peripheral region other than the bonding sub-region comprises a light shielding layer (figs. 1-2, ¶ 44-48, light-shielding layer 53 defines a frame portion of the image display area);
an inner contour of an orthographic projection of the light shielding layer on a substrate of the display panel contacts an edge of the displaying region (figs. 1-2, ¶ 44-48, light-shielding layer 53 defines a frame portion of the image display area);
and both of the first testing-unit group and the second testing-unit group are located on one side of the light shielding layer that is farther from the displaying region, and orthographic projections of the first testing-unit group and the second testing-unit group on the substrate do not overlap with the orthographic projection of the light shielding layer on the substrate (figs. 1-2, ¶ 44-48, inspection terminals 111-115 outside of light-shielding layer 53).
Peng and Ishii are both directed to display devices with inspection terminals. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the device of Peng with the light-shielding layer of Ishii since such a modification provides a frame-shaped light-shielding layer defining a frame portion of the image display area (Ishii, ¶ 44) and provides an inspection circuit that reduces power consumption and malfunctioning (Ishii, ¶ 7).
Dai teaches wherein each of the circuit testing units comprises a pad (figs. 1-2, ¶ 36-46, see also ¶ 49-53, bonding pad with bonding connector provided for test signal lines; see also ¶ 79-80).
Peng in view of Ishii and Dai are both directed to display devices with inspection terminals. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the device of Peng in view of Ishii with the pads of Dai since such a modification avoids erosions or electrostatic damages on the test signal line and avoid adversary effects on the quality of the array substrate (Dai, ¶ 53).
Regarding claim 2, Peng discloses wherein a minimum distance from the first testing-unit group to the first lateral side in the direction perpendicular to the first direction is equal to a minimum distance from the second testing-unit group to the second lateral side in the direction perpendicular to the first direction (figs. 2-4, ¶ 44-45, ¶ 68-76, test pads 21 and 22 on left and right sides of substrate 20 arranged symmetrically with respect to center of display region 210).
Regarding claim 4, Peng discloses wherein the peripheral region comprises a first peripheral sub-region, and the first peripheral sub-region is located on one side of the displaying region that is farther from the bonding sub-region (figs. 2-4, ¶ 44-45, ¶ 68-76, test pads 21 and 22 on opposite side from bonding pads 23 and 24);
some of the circuit testing units in the first testing-unit group are located in the first peripheral sub-region, and the other of the circuit testing units in the first testing-unit group are located in a region of the peripheral region that is closest to the first lateral side (figs. 2-4, ¶ 44-45, ¶ 68-76, e.g., test pads 21 and 22 grouped on left side of substrate 20);
and some of the circuit testing units in the second testing-unit group are located in the first peripheral sub-region, and the other of the circuit testing units in the second testing-unit group are located in a region of the peripheral region that is closest to the second lateral side (figs. 2-4, ¶ 44-45, ¶ 68-76, e.g., test pads 21 and 22 grouped on right side of substrate 20).
Regarding claim 5, Peng discloses wherein connecting lines between geometric centers of the circuit testing units in the first testing-unit group and connecting lines between geometric centers of the circuit testing units in the second testing-unit group individually form two intersecting line segments; or the connecting lines between the geometric centers of the circuit testing units in the first testing-unit group and the connecting lines between the geometric centers of the circuit testing units in the second testing-unit group are arc lines (figs. 2-4, ¶ 44-45, ¶ 68-76, test pads 21 and 22 grouped on left and right sides of substrate 20 form a line).
Regarding claim 6, Peng discloses wherein geometric centers of the circuit testing units in the first testing-unit group are located in a same line segment, and geometric centers of the circuit testing units in the second testing-unit group are located in a same line segment (figs. 2-4, ¶ 44-45, ¶ 68-76, test pads 21 and 22 grouped on left and right sides of substrate 20 form a line).
Regarding claim 8, Ishii further teaches wherein each of the first testing-unit group and the second testing-unit group comprises a first end closer to the bonding sub-region and a second end farther from the bonding sub-region (figs. 1-2, ¶ 44-48, inspection terminals 111-115 and bonding pads 102);
and a minimum distance between the first end and the displaying region in the direction perpendicular to the first direction is greater than or equal to a minimum distance between the second end and the displaying region in the direction perpendicular to the first direction (figs. 1-2, ¶ 44-48, inspection terminals 111-115 parallel to side of display area).
Regarding claim 9, Peng discloses wherein all of the circuit testing units in the first testing-unit group and the second testing-unit group are located in the first peripheral sub-region, and the circuit testing units in a same group are arranged in the direction perpendicular to the first direction (figs. 2-4, ¶ 44-45, ¶ 68-76, test pads 21 and 22 grouped on left and right sides of substrate 20 form a line);
and the first testing-unit group and the second testing-unit group are arranged in the first direction; or the first testing-unit group and the second testing-unit group are arranged in the direction perpendicular to the first direction (figs. 2-4, ¶ 44-45, ¶ 68-76, test pads 21 and 22 grouped on left and right sides of substrate 20 form a line).
Regarding claim 11, Ishii further teaches wherein in a direction parallel to a plane where the substrate is located, a minimum distance from the circuit testing units in the first testing-unit group and the second testing-unit group to the light shielding layer is less than a minimum distance from bonding terminals in the bonding sub-region to the light shielding layer (figs. 1-2, ¶ 44-48, inspection terminals 111-115 closer to light-shielding layer 53 than bonding pads 102).
Regarding claim 15, Ishii further teaches wherein the peripheral region further comprises a second peripheral sub-region, the second peripheral sub-region is located between the bonding sub-region and the displaying region, and the orthographic projection of the light shielding layer on the substrate falls within the region of the peripheral region other than the bonding sub-region (figs. 1-2, ¶ 44-48, region between pads 102 and display area);
and a distance in the first direction between a part of an outer contour of the light shielding layer that is located in the first peripheral sub-region and the edge of the displaying region is less than a distance in the first direction between a part of the outer contour of the light shielding layer that is located in the second peripheral sub-region and the edge of the displaying region (figs. 1-2, ¶ 44-48, e.g., seal area 52 and overlapping light-shielding layer 53 near pads 102 shown as wider than opposite seal area 52).
Regarding claim 20, Peng discloses wherein an area of an orthographic-projection pattern of the circuit testing units on the substrate is less than or equal to an area of an orthographic-projection pattern of the bonding terminals on the substrate (figs. 2-4, ¶ 44-45, ¶ 68-76, bonding pads 23 and 24 larger than test pads 21 and 22).
Regarding claim 24, Peng discloses a displaying device, wherein the displaying device comprises the display panel according to claim 1 (figs. 2-4, ¶ 44-45, ¶ 68-76, ¶ 86-87);
and the displaying device further comprises a flexible circuit board and a driving chip; or the display panel comprises a displaying controlling unit, and the displaying device further comprises a flexible circuit board (figs. 2-4, ¶ 79-84).
Regarding claim 29, Peng discloses wherein all of the circuit testing units in the first testing-unit group are located in a region of the peripheral region that is closest to the first lateral side, and all of the circuit testing units in the second testing-unit group are located in a region of the peripheral region that is closest to the second lateral side (figs. 2-4, ¶ 44-45, ¶ 68-76, test pads 21 and 22 grouped on left and right sides of substrate 20).
Claims 12 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Peng in view of Ishii and Dai as applied to claim 9 above, and further in view of Yu (US 2005/0046439).
Regarding claim 12, Peng in view of Ishii and Dai fails to disclose wherein the display panel comprises at least one third testing-unit group, the third testing-unit group comprises a plurality of transistor testing units, and the third testing-unit group is located in the first peripheral sub-region; and a distance between the transistor testing units and the light shielding layer is greater than or equal to a distance between the circuit testing units and the light shielding layer.
Yu teaches wherein the display panel comprises at least one third testing-unit group, the third testing-unit group comprises a plurality of transistor testing units, and the third testing-unit group is located in the first peripheral sub-region (fig. 3A, ¶ 24-25, detection pads 15 with transistors 39);
and a distance between the transistor testing units and the light shielding layer is greater than or equal to a distance between the circuit testing units and the light shielding layer (fig. 3A, ¶ 24-25, transistors 39 farther from display area than detection pads 15).
Peng in view of Ishii and Dai and Yu are both directed to display devices with inspection pads. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the device of Peng in view of Ishii and Dai with the transistors of Yu since such a modification reduces cost and promotes the maneuverability of the detection facility (Yu, ¶ 22).
Regarding claim 13, Yu further teaches wherein the third testing-unit group is located on one side of all of the circuit testing units that is farther from the displaying region, a gap is provided between the third testing-unit group and the light shielding layer, and both of the first testing-unit group and the second testing-unit group are located in the gap (fig. 3A, ¶ 24-25, transistors 39 farther from display area than detection pads 15).
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Peng in view of Ishii, Dai, and Yu as applied to claim 13 above, and further in view of Shi et al. (CN 114236923; published 3/25/22, machine translation provided).
Regarding claim 14, Yu further teaches wherein the display panel comprises two third testing-unit groups, the two third testing-unit groups are arranged in the direction perpendicular to the first direction (fig. 3A, ¶ 24-25, e.g., transistors 39 on right and left side of display).
Peng in view of Ishii, Dai, and Yu fails to disclose the first peripheral sub-region comprises an encoding pattern, and the encoding pattern is located between the two third testing-unit groups; and a minimum distance between the encoding pattern and the light shielding layer is greater than or equal to a minimum distance between the transistor testing units and the light shielding layer.
Shi teaches the first peripheral sub-region comprises an encoding pattern, and the encoding pattern is located between the two third testing-unit groups; and a minimum distance between the encoding pattern and the light shielding layer is greater than or equal to a minimum distance between the transistor testing units and the light shielding layer (figs. 1-4, test pads P in non-display area shown, identification pattern M placed in middle of test pads, see p. 4 of translation).
Peng in view of Ishii, Dai, and Yu and Shi are both directed to display devices with inspection pads. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the device of Peng in view of Ishii, Dai, and Yu with the encoding pattern of Shi since such a modification provides convenient recognition of the mark pattern and realizes the narrow frame of the display (Shi, translation p. 3).
Claims 16-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Peng in view of Ishii and Dai as applied to claim 15 above, and further in view of Koide et al. (US 2018/0356668).
Regarding claim 16, Peng in view of Ishii and Dai fails to disclose wherein a shape of the orthographic projection of the light shielding layer on the substrate comprises a rectangle having four rounded corners; and a curvature radius of two of the rounded corners of the rectangle that are closer to the bonding sub-region is greater than a curvature radius of two of the rounded corners of the rectangle that are closer to the first peripheral sub-region.
Koide teaches wherein a shape of the orthographic projection of the light shielding layer on the substrate comprises a rectangle having four rounded corners (fig. 8, ¶ 85-91, light shielding layer BM has a frame shape with rounded corners);
and a curvature radius of two of the rounded corners of the rectangle that are closer to the bonding sub-region is greater than a curvature radius of two of the rounded corners of the rectangle that are closer to the first peripheral sub-region (fig. 8, ¶ 85-91, light shielding layer BM has a frame shape with rounded corners, different radius of curvatures RA1, RA2, RA3).
Peng in view of Ishii and Dai and Koide are both directed to display devices with light shielding layers. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the device of Peng in view of Ishii and Dai with the layer shape of Koide since such a modification optimizes layout and reduces peripheral area (Koide, ¶ 4) and provides a light-shielding layer with a frame shape and four extending portions (Koide, ¶ 88-89).
Regarding claim 17, Koide further teaches wherein the display panel comprises a cover plate, the cover plate covers the displaying region and part of the area of the light shielding layer, and an outer contour of an orthographic projection of the cover plate on the substrate falls within the orthographic projection of the light shielding layer on the substrate (figs. 1-4, ¶ 37-41, SUB2 over layer BM, see also fig. 8; see also RX layer);
and four vertex angles of the outer contour of the orthographic projection of the cover plate on the substrate are located at the four rounded corners (figs. 1-4, ¶ 37-41, SUB2 over layer BM, see also fig. 8; see also RX layer).
Regarding claim 18, Koide further teaches wherein an area of a region of a part of the light shielding layer that is located in the first peripheral sub-region that does not overlap with the cover plate is less than an area of a region of a part of the light shielding layer that is located in the second peripheral sub-region that does not overlap with the cover plate (figs. 1-4, ¶ 37-41, SUB2 over layer BM, see also fig. 8; see also RX layer).
Claim 25 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Peng in view of Ishii and Dai as applied to claim 24 above, and further in view of Kaehler et al. (US 2019/0113752).
Regarding claim 25, Peng in view of Ishii and Dai fails to disclose a wearable device, wherein the wearable device comprises two instances of the displaying device according to claim 24, and further comprises two annular first supports, the displaying devices are fixed to the first supports, and each of the first supports covers a region of the peripheral region of the display panel that is not provided with the light shielding layer; and the circuit testing units in one of the displaying devices and the circuit testing units in the other of the displaying devices are arranged in mirror symmetry.
Kaehler teaches a wearable device, wherein the wearable device comprises two instances of the displaying device according to claim 24 (figs. 1-2, ¶ 13-18, left eye and right eye display panels),
and further comprises two annular first supports, the displaying devices are fixed to the first supports, and each of the first supports covers a region of the peripheral region of the display panel that is not provided with the light shielding layer (figs. 1-2, ¶ 13-18, housing for left eye and right eye display panels; see also fig. 5);
and the circuit testing units in one of the displaying devices and the circuit testing units in the other of the displaying devices are arranged in mirror symmetry (figs. 1-2, ¶ 13-18, left eye and right eye display panels).
Peng in view of Ishii and Dai and Kaehler are both directed to display devices with peripheral circuits. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the device of Peng in view of Ishii and Dai with the wearable device of Kaehler since such a modification provides a head mounted display device with an improved user experience (Kaehler, ¶ 12).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 10/8/25 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Regarding claim 1, Applicant argues “FIG. 2A of Peng shows that test pads 21 and 22 on left and right sides of substrate 20 are not arranged symmetrically with respect to center of display region 210” and “it is hindsight for the Examiner to consider that Peng discloses” this feature (Remarks, pp. 10-12). Examiner disagrees, as fig. 2A of Peng explicitly shows mirror symmetry for the test pads 21 and 22 with respect to the center of the display region 210, and thus Peng discloses “a maximum distance from the first testing-unit group to the first lateral side in a direction perpendicular to the first direction is equal to a maximum distance from the second testing-unit group to the second lateral side in the direction perpendicular to the first direction” as is claimed.
Applicant further argues that Peng and Ishii cannot be combined because Peng relates to OLED display panels and Ishii relates to liquid crystal display panels (Remarks, p. 13). Examiner disagrees. As discussed in the above rejection of claim 1, Peng and Ishii are both directed to display devices with inspection terminals. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the device of Peng with the light-shielding layer of Ishii since such a modification provides a frame-shaped light-shielding layer defining a frame portion of the image display area (Ishii, ¶ 44) and provides an inspection circuit that reduces power consumption and malfunctioning (Ishii, ¶ 7). In other words, Applicant merely claims a “display panel comprising a displaying region and a peripheral region”, and both of these references are clearly directed to a display panel comprising a displaying region and a peripheral region.
Applicant’s remaining arguments are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEITH L CRAWLEY whose telephone number is (571)270-7616. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 10-6 ET.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Temesghen Ghebretinsae can be reached at 571-272-3017. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/KEITH L CRAWLEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2626